LORIK Vs. HANUMAN PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondents were issued notices to engage another counsel vide Court's order dated 07.11.2012, pursuant whereto notices sent to respondents 1 and 2 on 22.11.2012. Perused office report dated 13.2.2013. Service is deemed sufficient. None has put in appearance on behalf of respondents, hence I proceed to hear the appeal ex parte against respondents.

(2.) The following two substantial questions of law were formulated by this Court while admitting appeal:

(3.) Besides above, during course of hearing, in my view, another substantial question of law has arisen, which is: